[51] I accept that the made-up entity Pharma Team System has a name sufficiently similar to the name of Teva’s real customer Pharma Systems that one might plausibly confuse the two. The same might be said of PCE Pharmacare and PCE Management Inc., though less obviously so. Indeed, the motion judge at para. 34 of his endorsement found that “the payees could plausibly be understood to be real entities and customers of the plaintiff.” I would not interfere with this finding and so I accept that Teva meets the first requirement of the modification in Boma to the non-existing payee defence.

[21] The students’ parents testified that in subsequent meetings Dr. Webber refused to allow prayer in private areas such as an outside garage, corridor, basement, behind trees or a closet. Instead, the students would have to go off campus. They testified that he suggested students could pray quietly in their head or quickly make a cross if no one was aware of the prayer, but did not want other children to see bowing or kneeling.

[107] Each of the inmates was maintained in segregation in part because of “jeopardy to the institution”. That expression is defined in s. 23 of Commissioner’s Directive 701, excerpts from which are quoted above at para. 55. However, there is no evidence whatever, either in the gist of the information given to the inmates or in the sealed document, which even addresses the location of the institutional arms storage facilities, perimeter intrusion detection system and the main computer and communication, any security system or any investigative techniques used for security intelligence purposes. Reliance on the wording of the statute rather than on the facts which pertain to these applicants demonstrates that the institution has not given the inmates adequate reasons, rather than conclusions, for their ongoing placement in segregation.